Why are comments so nasty on the Gate?

Commenters on the Gate love to hate expensive meals like you get at the recently reviewed Saison

What is it about the Internet — or maybe more specifically, its anonymous posters — that makes the vitriol storm though comment sections like a hurricane?

I was looking over the 175+ comments on the post I wrote Monday on Saison’s $298 tasting menu, and some of the comments were depressing to say the least. Depressing, because when people hide behind anonymity, their true personality emerges, and it’s not pretty, caring or even reasoned.

Yes, Saison is an expensive meal. And I understand why some would not be willing to pay the price, but it’s the anger and hatred that comes out in some of these comments that make me cringe.

A few examples: “Overpriced pretentious crap”; “Fools and their money are soon parted”; “Conspicuous consumption. No meal is worth that kind of money, period!”; “Saison is a sign of the impending apocalypse.”; and “Welcome to L’Idiot.”

And of course there were lots of moral judgments being made about feeding the poor, and harsh judgments about people who would spend that kind of money for a single dinner. Let’s set aside how generous many chefs are by cooking at benefits for the Food Bank, Meals on Wheels and other food related charities, or the fact that most chefs don’t get rich through their restaurants. The diners who are paying those kind of prices are also the ones who will probably give $10,000 to a worthy hunger cause. Can most commenters say the same?

Yet it can be a free-for-all because people don’t have to take responsibility for their words. I’ve always thought that if a commenter wants to truly be heard, he or she should be willing to identify themselves and take responsibility for their opinions. I have respect for differing opinions; I’m less open-minded about people who hide behind pseudonyms.

In particular, writing about luxury items shows how narrow-minded some people are. One commenter wrote: “If I want foam at that price, I’ll order a beer at Giants games, thank you very much.”

Well, I wouldn’t pay the $51 -$204 for a ticket to last night’s Giants game against the Colorado Rockies. However, I think having the team in San Francisco is a boon to the city and I can respect people who are avid fans and want to spend that money.

One commenter made that point very well:

People will spend hundreds on concert tickets without hesitation, blow loads of money on vacations, and spend exorbitant amounts of money on other “luxury” items. However, if people dine at a nice restaurant, they’re suddenly touted as snobs simply because they can’t relate to how others enjoy spending their own time and money.”

Why not give the same respect to people who might want to spend their disposable income on dining out?

It makes economic sense. Dining is one of the biggest tourist attractions in San Francisco and pumps millions of dollars into the economy. Diners have a choice, too; they can go to Popeye’s or Saison or places that fall somewhere in between. However, if everyone decided Popeye’s was good enough, San Francisco would be a very different city.

Cities with great cultures also have excellent restaurants; the two go hand-in-hand. I believe cooking is an art; you can dine to fill the space in your stomach, just as you might buy cheap posters to fill the walls of an apartment. But it’s the person willing to support an artist like Picasso or Mark Tansey who elevates and advances the art scene.